Month: March 2007

RA AND AR FMS’ MEETING IN GENEVA WAS ARDUOUS

DeFacto Agency, Armenia
March 21 2007

OSCE Parliamentary Assembly President Goran Lennmarker’s statement on
the possibility of signing an agreement on Karabagh between Armenia
and Azerbaijan upon completion of the Armenian parliamentary election
coincides with Yerevan’s stance, RA FM Vardan Oskanian stated in the
course of a press conference held at the IA Regnum’s press center.

However, in his words, RA and AR FMs’ latest meeting in Geneva
doesn’t offer ground for such optimism. "The meeting held in Geneva
again confirmed availability of contradictions that are hard for us
to alleviate. Although the meeting was arduous, we agreed to meet in
April again. We may manage to come to an agreement, and then it will
be possible to speak of a meeting of the two countries’ Presidents.

Certainly, the meeting will take place after the parliamentary election
in Armenia," Oskanian noted.

RA FM also said Armenia’s position had not been changed:
Nagorno-Karabagh’s status should be determined via a referendum
to be held among the NKR population. As for the Kosovo settlement
option, Vardan Oskanian remarked various approaches should be taken
to various conflicts. "What can work in one case is unacceptable in
another. Nevertheless, if the international community recognizes
Kosovo’s independence, it will have a positive influence on the
Nagorno-Karabagh conflict settlement. If not, we will continue talks to
elaborate a solution admissible for the Nagorno-Karabagh population,"
Armenia’s Foreign Minister underscored, PanARMENIAN.Net reports.

ARMENIAN PRESIDENT HELD THE ANNUAL MEETING WITH THE HEADS OF COMMERCIAL BANKS

Mediamax Agency, Armenia
March 21 2007

Yerevan, March 21 /Mediamax/. Armenian President Robert Kocharian
discussed the development prospects of the banking sector during the
annual meeting with the heads of commercial banks.

As Mediamax was told in the presidential press service today, Robert
Kocharian stated that despite the quick development speeds of the
Armenian banking sector, there is the necessity to enlarge the
banking sector of the country and to provide large-scale financial
services. In this context, the President highlighted the need to
implement new approaches and technologies.

During the meeting, the issues of mortgage crediting, implementation
of insurance system and pension reforms were discussed.

The bankers noted that the primary task for the increase of the level
of economy bankization is to attract inner financial resources into
the banking sector, for which it is necessary to increase the level
of confidence for the banks.

The heads of the banks also touched upon some shortcomings in the
legislation concerning the taxation of financial transactions.

During the meeting the activities of the Union of Banks of Armenia
was considered. The Chairman of the Union Stepan Gishian informed
the President that 19 banks are members of the structure. Recently
the Union became an associate member of the European Union of Banks,
which assists the enlargement of cooperation with the banking system
of Europe and implementation of new methods in the banking sector
of Armenia.

Robert Kocharian noted that he expects the banks to preserve the speeds
of development of the banking system and to implement new technologies.

AZERBAIJAN’S FOREIGN MINISTER MET WITH UN SECRETARY-GENERAL

Trend News Agency, Azerbaijan
March 21 2007

Azerbaijan, Baku / corr. Trend A.Ismaylova / The Ambassador of
Azerbaijan to the UN, Agshin Mehdiyev, informed Trend that the
present stage of negotiations regarding the Armenian-Azerbaijani
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was discussed on 20 March in New York at
the headquarters of the UN during the meeting of the Foreign Minister
of Azerbaijan, Elmar Mammadyarov, with the Secretary General of the
United Nations, Ban Ki-moon.

The Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan expressed Azerbaijan’s position that
a more active involvement from various international organizations,
including the UN, by adopting international law standards and
principles, including principles of sovereignty and territorial
integrity, would assist in the prompt settlement of the regional
conflicts.

Mammadyarov reported on the extractive industry transparency
initiatives and said that Azerbaijan is prepared to share its
experience in this regard with UN participating countries.

The Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan arrived in Washington on 21 March.

AZERBAIJANI, ARMENIAN PRESIDENTS MAY MEET IN JUNE

Azeri Press Agency, Azerbaijan
March 21 2007

Azerbaijan’s deputy foreign minister, Araz Azimov, was in Brussels
today looking for EU support on Baku’s stance on the conflict of the
Nagorno Karabakh.

Azimov spent much of his address to the European Parliament’s South
Caucasus delegation explaining why Kosovo should not be a precedent
for Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

RadioLiberty quoted the deputy minister saying "Kosovo issue is
different from the Azerbaijani issue, the Azerbaijani-Armenian
conflict. In this conflict, we have an open territorial claim by
Armenia. We have an open war erupted in 1992; even earlier we had
these military hostilities," Azimov stated, APA reports.

The EU has made clear it will not use a Kosovo resolution as a
blueprint for any of the so-called frozen conflicts in the former
Soviet Union while it was allegedly feared that the solution to the
Kosovo conflict could be set a precedent to the Nagorno Karabakh issue,
an Azeri enclave occupied by Armenia. Brussels says Kosovo is a unique
case because it alone is administered by the United Nations.

Azimov also argued that territorial solutions should reflect the
views of all sides in a conflict. To do otherwise, he said, would
undermine international law.

Hannes Swoboda, a senior Socialist European deputy, helped draft
a parliament declaration on Kosovo. He told Azimov he accepts the
Azerbaijani argument that the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh is quite
different from that of Kosovo.

But, he added, both cases are similar in the sense that it may be
"too late" to return to pre-conflict conditions. It’s a fact, he
suggested, that all the governments involved should accept.

"I think Kosovo never will be part of Serbia again," Swoboda said.

"[That] time is over. And at the same time, there may be some parallel
here for Nagorno-Karabakh. The question is not ‘What is the legal point
of view? Who is right?’ The legal point is clear — it’s an occupied
territory. But the question is what the key is to the future that is
good for Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the people in Nagorno-Karabakh?"

The Azerbaijani deputy foreign minister also said Baku prefers a
negotiated peaceful solution to the problem. Azimov said Aliyev and
his Armenian counterpart, Robert Kocharian, are planning to meet for
negotiations on the issue soon after the May 12 parliamentary elections
in Armenia. The presidents are expected to meet in early June. /APA/

WEST UNPREPARED TO MEDDLE IN ARMENIA
By Emil Danielyan for EurasiaNet

Spero News
March 21 2007

The US and the EU are unlikely to ostracize Armenia, despite election
warnings

The US and the EU are stepping up pressure on the Armenian government
to hold free-and-fair parliamentary elections on 12 May. They have
warned that if the upcoming vote is deemed fraudulent, Yerevan could
forfeit hundreds of millions of dollars in additional development
assistance, and undermine its efforts to forge closer links with
the West.

However, analysts are skeptical that the warnings will have
much influence on the behavior of President Robert Kocharian’s
administration. The outcome of the parliamentary balloting will go a
long way toward determining the political futures of both Kocharian
and his most powerful associate, Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian,
many Armenian political observers believe. Some say that neither the
US nor EU is prepared to take the kind of action that would seriously
challenge the president’s nearly decade-long grip on power.

None of the presidential and parliamentary elections held under
the Kocharian administration until now were judged democratic by
Western monitors. The most recent of those polls, held in early
2003, were marred by reports of widespread ballot box stuffing,
voter intimidation, vote buying, and other irregularities.

US and EU officials say the upcoming elections offer a unique
opportunity for the South Caucasus state to end its post-Soviet history
of electoral fraud. "People [in the West] feel that there can be no
more excuses," said one Western diplomat in Yerevan. "The Armenian
economy is growing, and there is no active war in Nagorno-Karabakh. So
it’s time for Armenia to graduate into a normal political life."

Cory Welt, a senior Russia and Eurasia analyst at the Washington-based
Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed, saying that
a clean election would give a "huge boost" to Armenia’s international
reputation. "As time goes on, there are [fewer] reasons, not more, for
Western states to promote engagement with an Armenian government that
seeks to rule through anti-democratic methods," he told EurasiaNet.

The issue was reportedly high on the agenda of Armenian Foreign
Minister Vartan Oskanian’s 5 March talks in Washington with US
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Top State Department officials,
including Rice, have repeatedly warned that if the forthcoming
elections again fall short of democratic standards, Yerevan will
risk losing US$235 million in US economic assistance promised under
the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), a program designed to spur
political and economic reforms in developing nations. Armenia was
deemed eligible for the scheme, unveiled by President George W Bush in
2004, despite being one of the world’s leading per-capita recipients
of American aid.

Testifying before a foreign aid subcommittee of the US House of
Representatives on 15 March, the head of a US government agency
administering the MCA, John Danilovich, said he "communicated" with
Kocharian earlier this year to reiterate Washington’s "concerns that
elections be held in a correct manner." One of Danilovich’s deputies,
John Hewko, visited Yerevan for the same purpose earlier in March.

"We expect to see significant improvement over past elections,"
Hewko told reporters there.

For its part, the EU is tying the proper election conduct to Armenia’s
participation in the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) framework that
entitles the country, along with neighboring Georgia and Azerbaijan, to
a privileged relationship with the bloc, better access to its market,
and greater EU aid. Each of the three regional states signed with
the EU last November its own ENP action plan, each of which includes
provisions designed to promote democratization.

The EU’s Brussels-based special representative to the South Caucasus,
Peter Semneby, discussed preparations for the May polls with senior
Armenian officials during an early March visit to Yerevan. "It is
the first major election taking place in the South Caucasus after
we finalized the action plans," Semneby told RFE/RL. "And for that
reason it has an importance that goes beyond the borders of Armenia."

Failure to ensure its freedom and fairness would mean that Armenia
has lost an opportunity to build a "firm relationship" with the EU,
he warned.

Yet neither loss of the MCA funds, nor exclusion from the ENP would
threaten the political survival of Armenia’s two most powerful leaders
accustomed to Western criticism. Kocharian is believed to be planning
to hand over power to Sarkisian and remain in government in some
capacity after completing his second and final term in office in less
than a year from now. Continued control of the Armenian parliament
is seen as critical for the success of this putative scenario.

The US and the EU have so far left no indications that, in the event
of another deeply flawed election, they would openly challenge the
legitimacy of the authorities in Yerevan. "I don’t think the West will
take any sharp steps against Kocharian’s regime," Aleksandr Arzumanian,
a former foreign minister opposed to the current Armenian government,
told EurasiaNet. Arzumanian dismissed the Western incentives for
Armenia’s democratization, saying that they alone will not prevent
fresh vote rigging.

According to analyst Welt, Washington’s "only really significant
lever" is MCA aid and a "US stamp of approval" which it would give
to Yerevan. "Whether such US approval really matters to Armenia’s
authorities is another question," he said. "If they believe they
have sufficient support from countries like Russia and Iran, then
termination of MCA aid will mean little."

Another factor that may prompt the Bush administration to tread
lightly is connected with the long-running Nagorno-Karabakh peace
process, some observers believe. American, French and Russian
diplomats who are trying to broker a solution hope that Kocharian
and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev will meet shortly after the
Armenian elections and finally cut a peace deal. Diplomats privy to
the peace process say Aliyev and Kocharian have already essentially
agreed on the basic principles of a peaceful settlement proposed by
the mediators. Washington, which has long held a Karabakh settlement
to be a top policy priority for the region, seems unlikely to undercut
either leader under the current circumstances.

Emil Danielyan is a Yerevan-based journalist and political analyst.

EurasiaNet provides information and analysis about political, economic,
environmental, and social developments in the countries of Central
Asia and the Caucasus, as well as in Russia, the Middle East, and
Southwest Asia. The website presents a variety of perspectives on
contemporary developments, utilizing a network of correspondents
based both in the West and in the region. The aim of EurasiaNet is
to promote informed decision making among policy makers, as well as
broadening interest in the region among the general public.

EurasiaNet is operated by the Central Eurasia Project of the Open
Society Institute.

IRAN-ARMENIA GAS PIPELINE: FAR MORE THAN MEETS THE EYE
By Vladimir Socor

Eurasia Daily Monitor, DC
March 21 2007

On March 19 Presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Robert Kocharian
of Armenia inaugurated the operations of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline
(Armenpress, IRNA, March 19, 20). Although the project’s scope is
modest in terms of volume and market potential, its commissioning
reflects two incipient trends of Eurasia-wide and potentially global
impact, in some ways as their harbinger: First, Gazprom’s looming
deficit of gas; and, second, Russia-Iran relations in the context of
the proposed "cartel for gas."

It is unprecedented for Russia to yield a part of the gas market in
a former Soviet country to a supplier from outside Gazprom’s sphere
of influence. This policy choice to de-monopolize is almost certainly
not a willing choice. It seems to reflect calculations that Gazprom
may soon be unable to meet all of its supply commitments to internal
and external markets from the stagnant production in Russia.

Thus, it may make sense for Gazprom to plan a partial retrenchment
from some of its markets, if three prerequisites exist: non-lucrative
supply contracts (low-priced gas in a small market), strong Russian
influence in that country irrespective of gas dependency, and an
alternative supplier that cannot impinge on Russian interests in that
country or farther afield.

All those prerequisites exist in Armenia. In such a situation, Russia
could share that country’s market with a third country, such as Iran,
whose gas export policies it hopes — with some justification —
to be able to control in the short and medium term.

In a generally little-noted though momentous event (see EDM, March
6), Gazprom declined to present its overdue prognosis for gas output
beyond 2010 during the Russian cabinet of ministers’ March 2 session.

Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov had to urge in front of television
cameras, "The situation should not be over-dramatized." That same day,
Russia’s Chamber of Accounts criticized Gazprom for under-investing
in exploration, field development, and infrastructure maintenance
in Russia while over-investing in acquisitions unrelated to
production. This public turn of events seems indirectly to confirm
the forecasts made last year by Vladimir Milov, Alan Riley, and David
Clark that Gazprom faces a gap between its production and its supply
commitments post-2010.

Iran’s entry in Armenia as a gas supplier courtesy of Russia seems
also to be a harbinger of that trend. It also sheds light on Moscow’s
view of possible coordination of gas export policies with those of
Iran. The government in Tehran has not abandoned its hopes to achieve
a transit route for its gas into the South Caucasus and farther into
European Union territory, with Armenia as the first way station on
that possible route. Moscow, however, strongly opposes such a prospect.

Thus, Gazprom took major precautionary measures against an expansion
of Iran’s role and indeed against any independent Iranian gas-export
policy in Armenia or beyond. It imposed from the outset on Yerevan
— against Tehran’s will — to reduce the Iran-Armenia pipeline’s
diameter from the originally designed 1,420 millimeters (the size of
major gas export pipelines) to 700 millimeters. This measure precludes
any transit of Iranian gas to third countries through this pipeline,
confining Iran to the Armenian market.

Moreover, Kocharian agreed with Russian President Vladimir Putin
last year to hand the new pipeline’s section on Armenian territory
over to Gazprom via the ArmRosGaz company, in which Gazprom and
its offshoot Itera hold a combined 68% interest. Controlling the
pipeline and distribution network within the country, Moscow can
exercise all but discretionary control over the access of gas from
a third-country supplier — a situation that Moscow seeks to achieve
in certain European countries as well.

By blocking the access of Iranian gas to Europe, the Kremlin
demonstrates its unwillingness to share European markets with Iran
through a "gas cartel" or in any other form. However, Moscow is
signaling almost as clearly that it seeks joint-venture cooperation
to develop Iran’s vast, untapped gas fields and direct their output
toward Asian markets, away from Europe where Gazprom seeks to cement
its own preserve. This strategy can only succeed if Russia retains
its present monopoly on the transit and marketing of Turkmen, Kazakh,
and Uzbek gas.

Almost certainly, "Iranian" gas to be supplied to Armenia will actually
originate in Turkmenistan for the time being. Iran imports small
volumes of Turkmen gas to supply the northern part of the country,
which is distant from Iran’s main fields. The Iran-Armenia pipeline
runs for 101 kilometers in Iran from Tabriz to the Armenian border and
for another 41 kilometers in Armenia from the border town of Meghri to
Kajaran. The next planned section, to be built by 2008-2009, should
run for another 100 kilometers toward central Armenia, there to link
up with the existing distribution network, controlled by Gazprom as
well (Mediamax, Noyan Tapan, IRNA, March 19-21; see EDM, November 3,
7, 2006)

Armenia consumes approximately 1.5 billion cubic meters of gas
annually. Iran is to supply some 400 million cubic meters annually in
the first stage of the project and up to 2.3 billion cubic meters in
the second stage, at which time Armenia’s consumption may well have
increased, even as Gazprom’s ability to meet customer requirements
is likely to have declined.

QUESTIONS ON KOSOVO
by Nikolas K. Gvosdev

The National Interest Online, DC
March 21 2007

We need a honest, open and reasoned debate on the future status
of Kosovo.

No solution or proposal should escape detailed and close scrutiny. We
need no repeats of the run-up to the Iraq War, with its rosy
predictions about cakewalks and being greeted as liberators and how
Iraqi oil income would pay for reconstruction.

We know the many drawbacks of plans which fall short of granting the
province full independence-with one of the major objections being the
right of self-determination. Fair enough. None of the plans for any
sort of confederal state, maximum autonomy or even something along
the model of the Aland Islands are cost free, particularly because
they would have to be imposed on a population that wants independence.

But those who argue for independence must also answer a few hard
questions.

The first is to explain why they are so confident why a local
government that under UN and NATO supervision has been unable to crack
down on crime and human trafficking or to provide adequate guarantees
for the ethnic minorities of the province will somehow be much more
effective if independence is granted. I don’t buy the argument that
the province’s "undefined status" prevents effective governance. Case
in point: Taiwan.

"Standards before status" was a good policy to have adopted and should
still remain the guiding principle. And as we have seen in East Timor,
granting independence is not a panacea and does not in and of itself
guarantee stability.

"Conditional" independence is problematic because once granted I don’t
see the EU or NATO going back in to retake control should things not
work out. So I think we have a right to see something more concrete
than statements about how things will get better if only independence
is to be granted.

The second is why Kosovo sets no precedent. Forget whether or not the
Russians are going to recognize Abkhazia or Ossetia in retaliation. I
can’t see the U.S. government-particularly the Congress-prepared
to extend the formal guarantees to other countries (and separatist
regions) about Kosovo not setting any precedent. Already the first
rumblings among some conservatives has begun about Taiwan not really
being a part of China, Shanghai communique be damned! Can a U.S.

president send a letter to Hu Jintao that publicly affirms no Kosovo
precedent for Taiwan? A similar resolution about Nagorno-Karabakh
getting past Speaker Nancy Pelosi? (By the way, the official
representation office of the unrecognized Nagorno Karabakh Republic
has this to say on its website:

Since its decade-old independence, NKR has enjoyed all attributes
and institutions of statehood. Indeed, Karabakh’s de facto statehood
fully satisfies the requirements of conventional and customary
international laws for de-jure recognition. Since its decade-old
independence, NKR has enjoyed all attributes and institutions of
statehood. Indeed, Karabakh’s de facto statehood fully satisfies the
requirements of conventional and customary international laws for
de-jure recognition. . . .

The Nagorno Karabakh Republic appeals to the U.S. Congress to formally
recognize the right of its people to live free of external threats
and be masters of our own destiny. . . . We ask the United States to
welcome a new nation that truly embraces and stands unequivocally for
such universal values as freedom, democracy and equal justice under
law for all.

Because it will promote stability, peace and economic prosperity
for all peoples of the South Caucasus, formal recognition of the
independent Republic of Nagorno Karabakh is in interest of the
international community.

These arguments sound familiar, don’t they?

Saying that Kosovo sets no precedent is not like a magic phrase that
if repeated three times (and accompanied by a clicking of the heels)
means that it is so. The Regnum News Agency is quoting unnamed sources
that a number of Middle Eastern countries in light of the Kosovo
precedent are preparing to recognize the Turkish Republic of North
Cyprus and that even the U.S. State Department may be considering such
a step by the end of 2007. On that latter point, I hope that that is
Levantian hot air and not seriously being considered at Foggy Bottom.

I understand the desire of many here in Washington to get Kosovo
"off" the agenda. Independence may end up being the best course of
action. But let’s not delude ourselves into thinking that there is
an easy, cost-free solution.

Nikolas K. Gvosdev is editor of The National Interest.

.aspx?id=13876

FRANCOPHONE WORLD TOUR
Christina Leadlay

Embassy Magazine, Canada
March 21 2007

Film festivals in Ottawa are regularly the domain of the Canadian
Film Institute, but this week the ByTowne Cinema is hosting the mainly
francophone Divercine film fest, which opens March 23.

Seven films dominate the schedule, a few of them playing twice during
the week, including opening night screening Reves de poussière. This
film from Burkina Faso follows Mocktar, a Malian peasant who tries
to forget a past tragedy through hard labour in a mining camp where
he befriends the young widow Coumba.

Congorama is a joint production between Canada, Belgium and France,
and doesn’t contain English subtitles. It’s the story of a young
Belgian inventor who returns to the Quebec village where he was born,
and winds up in a car accident with a man in mourning for his father.

Another road movie is Le Voyage en Armenie, set almost entirely in
Armenia. When Anna discovers her father is ill, he leaves France to
head back home to Armenia, with his daughter in hot pursuit.

Another film without English translation is L’immeuble Yacoubian, a
film meditating on the history of Egyptian society from the pharaohs
to the Muslims, exploring corruption, prostitution and fundamentalism
amongst other ideas.

A Romeo and Juliet-style film is MaRock, about a Muslim party girl
who falls in love with a hip Jewish guy in Morocco’s club scene.

Falafel also contains elements of love, parties and frustration.

Tou’s pursuit of Yasmin is thrown off course when he gets involved
in a parking lot squabble.

Bamako, the third film in the series with no English subtitles,
sets a tale of domestic dispute against demonstrations against
international politics.

For the kiddies, there’s even a weekend screening of Azur et Asmar,
an animated feature about two boys who grew up like brothers in
magical, medieval Maghreb, but who become enemies in their quest for
the Djinns fairy. The opening night ceremony features two short films
by aboriginal Canadian filmmaker Manon Barbeau: La Lettre and Courage.

The Divercine Film Festival starts March 23 and runs every night
through March 29. Check the Ottawa Listings for details.

–Boundary_(ID_Frf74fSmSahoulT4+x3xbg)–

ARMENIAN NATION WILL NOT FORGET IRAN’S ASSISTANCES

Fars News Agency, Iran
March 21 2007

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- President of Armenia Robert Kocharian
stressed the point that the Armenian nation will not forget the
assistances that the Islamic Republic of Iran provided to the Armenian
nation during the hard times experienced by the Armenian nation.

President of Armenia Robert Kocharian said following inauguration
of Iran-Armenia natural gas pipeline project, "In the first place,
I congratulate everyone on the occasion of this memorable day, for,
inauguration of the Iran-Armenia gas pipeline project opened a new
chapter in the relations between the two nations".

He further reiterated that the Armenian nation will never forget the
assistances provided by the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Armenian
nation under those hard conditions.

In conclusion Kocharian thanked the Iranian president and all the
officials in charge of the construction of the gas pipeline project.

RICE DODGES QUESTIONS ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Radio Liberty, Czech Rep.
March 21 2007

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday that the
United States should not be involved in a dispute between Turkey and
Armenia over whether the killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians almost
a century ago constituted genocide.

Under intense questioning from Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, the sponsor
of a resolution that would declare that Turkey’s Ottoman predecessor
state committed genocide, Rice repeatedly avoided answering whether
she believed there was any basis for historical debate on the matter.

"What we’ve encouraged the Turks and the Armenians to do is to have
joint historical commissions that can look at this, to have efforts
to examine their past, and in examining their past to get over it,"
she said. "I don’t think it helps that process of reconciliation for
the United States to enter this debate at that level."

The dispute involves the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Armenians
during the waning years of the Ottoman Empire. Armenian advocates,
backed by many historians, contend they died in an organized genocide;
the Turks say they were victims of widespread chaos and governmental
breakdown as the 600-year-old empire collapsed in the years before
Turkey was born in 1923.